Chapter 15 End-of-chapter questions

Trends relating to judicial review have ebbed and flowed over time. Below are a number of statements relating to these trends. Which are accurate? Select all that apply.

Throughout the last ten years, only a small number of judicial review claims have been successful at permission stage.

Throughout the last ten years, there has been a relatively high rate of case settlement following success at the permission stage.

Throughout the last ten years, a majority of judicial review cases have concerned immigration issues.

Throughout the last ten years, the time taken by the High Court to make decisions in judicial review cases has increased.

Throughout the last ten years, the government has introduced greater restrictions for those seeking to utilise judicial review.

Throughout the last ten years, the number of successful judicial review cases against the government has skyrocketed.

The question of what role 'policy' should play in the determination of judicial review challenges is a contested one. Which of the statements below sets out the best overview of these issues?

In judicial review cases, judges often rely on open-textured and malleable tools, but since they are never called upon to decide issues involving an allocation of values, such as whether given conduct was 'reasonable' or 'proportionate', these tools are effective in the majority of cases. Judicial review largely avoids political issues or questions concerning the allocation of resources, but the breadth of judicial discretion in this area has nonetheless caused some to urge for judicial restraint, at least in certain areas.

In judicial review cases, judges are constrained to using tools which are largely opaque and straightforwardly applied, but since they are asked to apply these to situations which involve the allocation of values, such as whether conduct was 'reasonable' or 'proportionate', these tools break down. Because judicial review cases often invite judges to make decisions involving political issues and allocation of resources, this means that judges can bring their own preferences into the political realm. This has caused some to urge for judicial restraint, at least in certain areas.

In judicial review cases, judges often rely on open-textured and malleable tools, and must determine issues which involve the allocation of certain values, such as whether conduct was 'reasonable' or 'proportionate'. Because judicial review cases often invite judges to make decisions involving political issues and allocation of resources, this means that judges can bring their own preferences into the political realm. This has caused some to urge for judicial restraint, at least in certain areas.

In judicial review cases, judges often rely on open-textured and malleable tools, and must determine issues which involve the allocation of certain values, such as whether conduct was 'reasonable' or 'proportionate'. The procedure for judicial review contains a number of restrictions and qualifications, but judges are simply ignoring these in order to impose their own preferences in the cases they decide. This has caused some to urge for judicial restraint, at least in certain areas.

Judicial review can often have significant effects for the parties involved, but why is its ability to influence routine administrative decision-making limited? Select all that apply.

Some administrative decision-makers may be unaware of the elementary principles of judicial review, or lack the understanding of how to comply with judgments in practice.

Judges are not respected in the United Kingdom.

Compliance with judicial review may be a low priority for decision-makers, who may 'risk' losing a court battle at some point in the future in return for more immediate political pay-offs.

Judicial review is often concerned with one isolated decision, and the implications of any given judicial review decision for wider practice are often unclear or disputed.

Given the role of judicial review, why might it be regarded as constitutionally improper for politicians to criticise judges, or certain judicial review decisions they hand down, in public?

It challenges the notion of parliamentary sovereignty.

It risks undermining the independence of the judiciary, an important safeguard actor in ensuring a proper separation of powers.

It risks breaching the provisions of certain pieces of primary legislation such as the Defamation Act 2013 and the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

It risks violating certain rights contained in the European Convention, namely the right to a private life and the right to a fair trial.

Match each of the cases below to the actions taken by the government or other public body in response to them.

The administrative procedure for prison hearings was changed so that oral hearings became much more prominent.

The blanket policy separating prisoners from cell searches was modified to a rule whereby the prisoner can sometimes be present during the search but can be removed under certain circumstances.

The government pushed legislation through Parliament to reverse the effect of the decision, thereby denying the company in this case the possibility of applying for compensation.

The local authority spent considerable financial resources on ensuring aftercare provisions were applied to unaccompanied immigrants upon turning 18.

Whilst the minister put the question of whether to alter milk subsidies to a specialist board, they then proceeded to reject that advice and come to the same conclusion as they had previously done.

A statutory instrument was quickly passed following the judgment to amend the defective immigration hearing procedure.

Quiz Content